The International Court of Justice, the United Nations (UN) highest court, is set to commence historic hearings on Monday regarding the legality of Israel’s 57-year-long occupation of territories sought by Palestinians for statehood, thrusting the 15 international judges back into the heart of the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Scheduled to last six days, the hearings at the International Court of Justice will witness participation from an unprecedented number of countries, amidst Israel’s ongoing devastating assault on the Gaza Strip.
Although the case unfolds against the backdrop of the war between Israel and Hamas, its focus shifts to Israel’s continuous occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem instead.
In 2004, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion on Palestine, resulting in a legal ruling concerning Israel’s construction of the separation barrier in the occupied Palestinian territory, including within and around East Jerusalem.
The court ruled that the construction of the barrier violated international law and ordered Israel to dismantle it and compensate for the damages incurred. However, Israel disregarded the ruling.
The case to be examined by the court on Monday is unrelated to the recent lawsuit filed by South Africa against Israel, accusing it of genocide, which is awaiting a forthcoming verdict.
Legitimacy of the Occupation Case
Palestinian representatives at the court, set to present first on Monday, emphasize that the Israeli occupation is illegal as it breaches three fundamental principles of international law, according to statements made by the Palestinian legal team to journalists on Wednesday.
The Palestinian representatives argue that Israel has violated the prohibition against land invasion by annexing significant portions of the occupied territories, breached the Palestinians’ right to self-determination, and imposed a system of discrimination and apartheid.
Omar Awadallah, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for the United Nations and its specialized agencies expressed a desire for the court to consider new perspectives, including the term “genocide” about the separate case from South Africa.
“Now we want them to think about apartheid,” he added, highlighting the call for the court’s attention to the issue of racial segregation and discrimination.
